SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, B.V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.
BAHARUL ISLAM & ORS. – Appellants
VERSUS
THE INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND ORS. - RESPONDENTS
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 502-503 OF 2023, SLP (C) Nos. 32592-32593 of 2015, TC (C) NO. 25 OF 2018, TC (C) NO. 24 OF 2018
Decided on : 24-01-2023
JUDGMENT :
NAGARATHNA, J.
| INDEX | ||
| Sl. No. | Particulars | |
| 1. | Brief facts of the case | |
| 2. | Bird’s Eye View of the controversy | |
| 3. | Submissions on behalf of the appellants | |
| 4. | Arguments on behalf of R-1 | |
| 5. | Arguments on behalf of R-7 | |
| 6. | Submissions on behalf of the State of Assam | |
| 7. | Points for consideration | |
| 8. | Constitutional Scheme | |
| 9. | Contentions on behalf of the UOI | |
| 10. | Interplay between Entry 66 of List 1 and Entry 25 of List III | |
| 11. | Relevant provisions of Indian MEDICAL COUNCIL ACT , 1956 | |
| 12. | Relevant provisions of Assam Rural Health Regulatory Authority Act , 2004 | |
| 13. | A comparative table and analysis of the provisions of the IMC Act, 1956 and the Assam Act | |
| 14. | Triology of cases | |
| 15. | Conclusions: |
Leave granted.
2. In these appeals, the appellants have assailed the legality and correctness of the order dated 30.10.2014 passed by the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court in W.P.(C) No. 5789/2005, whereby the High Court by allowing the Writ Petition struck down the Assam Rural Health Regulatory Authority Act , 2004 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Assam Act’ or the ‘State Act’ for the sake of brevity) which was enacted by the Assam State Legislature.
Brief facts of the case:
3. The facts giving rise to the present appeals and transferred cases, in a nutshell are that on 18.09.2004, the Assam Legislature enacted the Assam Act. The said Act was enacted to provide for the establishment of a regulatory authority in the State of Assam to register the Diploma holders in Medicine and Rural Health Care (“DMRHC”), to regulate their practice in medicine in rural areas and to regulate the opening of medical institutions to impart education and training for the course of Diploma in Medicine and Rural Health Care.
3.1. On 23.06.2005, the Director, Medical Education, State of Assam, published an advertisement in the Assam Tribune inviting applications from eligible candidates seeking admissions in the three-year course of Diploma in Medicine and Rural Health Care in the Medical Institute, Jorhat, for the session starting in the year 2005.
3.2. The Indian Medical Association, Assam State Branch, Respondent No. 1 herein, filed a Writ Petition being W.P. (C) No. 5789 of 2005 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, before the Gauhati High Court, assailing the validity of the Assam Act and the aforesaid advertisement. During the pendency of the Writ Petition before the High Court, the appellants herein were admitted in the First year of the three-year Diploma Course in Medicine and Rural Health Care in the Medical Institute, Jorhat, (‘Jorhat Medical Institute’ for the sake of convenience) for the sessions 2012-2013, 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 respectively, pursuant to the selection process.
3.3. Having regard to the fact that the Jorhat Medical Institute was created as envisaged under the State Act, and about four-hundred students had been admitted to the diploma course and awarded certificates on having passed the Course, State of Assam made a plea for impleadment of the Regulatory Authority, the Jorhat Medical Institute and the persons who had obtained diploma certificates and had been engaged as Rural Health Practitioners on the basis of such qualification.
3.4. By the impugned order dated 19.09.2014, the High Court rejected the State’s plea for impleadment of the Regulatory Authority, the Jorhat Medical Institute and the persons who had obtained diploma certificates from the said Institute during the pendency of the Writ Petition before the High Court.
3.5. The pertinent findings of the High Court, in the impugned order dated 19.09.2014 may be summarized as under:
i) That the State ha
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Institute cannot prescribe qualifications in variance with or in derogation of the qualifications prescribed by NMC. The court accepted th....
As per Clause 3 of the Scheme, which deals with qualifying criteria, the medical college/institution shall qualify to apply for increasing the number of admission in MBBS/PG Diploma/Degree/Higher Spe....
The qualifications prescribed under the Special Rules for Associate Professor posts supplement rather than undermine the minimum standards set by the Council Regulation 2013, ensuring qualified candi....
Imposing mandatory rural service for admission to postgraduate medical courses is arbitrary, creates unjustified reservations, and infringes the rights of qualified non-in-service candidates.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.